Amid bipartisan calls to tighten the screws on social media platforms in Australia, an appearance by the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, on TV panel show Q+A accidentally gave the game away.
An eSafety Commissioner who obviously considers herself very eSafe and eEffective. Also, I would trust YouGov polling almost as much as I would trust Big Harma clinical trial results. It seems to me they are used just as much to push public opinion in the direction of the agenda as they are to discover what the population actually thinks.
Yep, just what this 64 year old man needs, a fucking purple haired HR Manager intent on making me THINK that pooftas can get pregnant, that gene altering emergency use authorised mRNA isn't killing all of its sheep, I mean victims, that the Zionist Jew terrorists murdering Gaza civilians are just like us, and that Oz needs to spend $800,000,000,000 on Nuke subs we'll never operate... Kommissar? GET FUCKED.
Do you think there's an argument for eSafety continuing with managing child sex abuse and bullying content and image based abuse, but reducing the remit to stay out of legal expression and culture war issues?
The problem with any bureaucratic/government body is that they will end up writing their own remits, usually by stealth. NSW ICAC is a current example. Mission creep is how they augment their influence initially and then, when everyone's used to their interference, it gets codified in regulations. It's a very old trick but it still works a treat. So any body charged with implementing censorship, no matter how noble the objective, must have its remit and responsibilities defined very closely or the "nothing to see here" brigade takes over.
An eSafety Commissioner who obviously considers herself very eSafe and eEffective. Also, I would trust YouGov polling almost as much as I would trust Big Harma clinical trial results. It seems to me they are used just as much to push public opinion in the direction of the agenda as they are to discover what the population actually thinks.
Big Harma 👏
🙏yet child porn still exists on the web🤷♀️
Inman Grant is behaving as I would expect an ex-social media manager, Malcolm Turnbull appointee to behave.
My concern if the fawning praise showered on her by Peter Dutton.
To me, this demonstrates that censorship is a bipartisan policy, and the more authoritarian the commissar, the better.
Yep, just what this 64 year old man needs, a fucking purple haired HR Manager intent on making me THINK that pooftas can get pregnant, that gene altering emergency use authorised mRNA isn't killing all of its sheep, I mean victims, that the Zionist Jew terrorists murdering Gaza civilians are just like us, and that Oz needs to spend $800,000,000,000 on Nuke subs we'll never operate... Kommissar? GET FUCKED.
Incisively exposed duplicity - hats off !
Bottom line, she & her department should go! Absolute waste of taxpayers money!
Do you think there's an argument for eSafety continuing with managing child sex abuse and bullying content and image based abuse, but reducing the remit to stay out of legal expression and culture war issues?
Yes I do, with a very 'narrow' remit to those things only - with no power(s) regarding speech, feelings, etc.
The problem with any bureaucratic/government body is that they will end up writing their own remits, usually by stealth. NSW ICAC is a current example. Mission creep is how they augment their influence initially and then, when everyone's used to their interference, it gets codified in regulations. It's a very old trick but it still works a treat. So any body charged with implementing censorship, no matter how noble the objective, must have its remit and responsibilities defined very closely or the "nothing to see here" brigade takes over.